My religion defines who I am, and I’ve been a practicing Catholic my whole life. And has particularly informed my social doctrine. The Catholic social doctrine talks about taking care of those who – who can’t take care of themselves, people who need help. With regard to – with regard to abortion, I accept my church’s position on abortion as a – what we call a (inaudible) doctrine. Life begins at conception in the church’s judgment. I accept it in my personal life. But I refuse to impose it on equally devout Christians and Muslims and Jews, and I just refuse to impose that on others, unlike my friend here, the – the congressman. I – I do not believe that we have a right to tell other people that – women they can’t control their body. –Joe Biden, the Vice Presidential Debate
This sounds so magnanimous, doesn’t it?
“I know what I believe, but I won’t force what I believe on other people. Every person has a right to lead their lives the way they want to!”
Here we have the left wing love of freedom in full hue and cry in just about it’s strongest forms, because it’s on one of the most difficult topics of our time — dealing with the collision between the life of a child and the life of the child’s mother. When two lives are in the balance, how do you choose one over the other? According to Joe Biden, one of the standard bearers for the liberal left, you simply declare religious belief off limits as playing any part in the decision.
But let’s look at the overall project of the left wing, and see how their “love of freedom” actually plays out.
Assume, for a moment, that you are a doctor (or a nurse, or a pharmacist). How does a woman actually get an abortion? By going to a doctor, who must then perform the abortion. With his hands, which are — obviously — a part of his body.
And if he refuses to perform the abortion? Then he is told by the government that he can no longer be a doctor. To put it in short terms, the doctor is forced to do with his body what he doesn’t agree with so a woman can do with her body what she chooses.
And here we reach the basic problem in the left wing premise, for we can apply this reasoning to just about anything the left wing thinker wants to do.
“A person has a right to free housing, no matter what their circumstances. We shouldn’t tell people how to live their lives just so they can have a place to live.” Which means, of course, that someone must build that house and give it to the person who isn’t paying for it. Again, you’re telling the builder what he must do with his body in order to prevent from telling the homeless person what he must do.
“I’m not going to tell anyone what they should do with their bodies,” is a hoax, a bit of nonsense that’s been allowed to fester and grow out there in the wild for far too long. You can’t give anyone anything without telling someone else what to do with their body; all belief must translate into physical action someplace to actually be meaningful in the real world.
The left wing doesn’t love freedom in general, it loves freedom in the specific — the ability to do what you want without consequence, because you can always tell someone else to take care of the results of your mistake.